Based on the judge’s comments, I suspect he berates both parties a bit, Hostess makes some concessions, and the union decides that maybe people having jobs is better than having no jobs. I’m sure the Teamsters will give the bakers some advice, but we probably won’t hear about that.

A lot of it will depend on how far gone the company is financially after the last week.

“The California Republican Party is functionally dead. And how is California doing, now that liberals have successfully terminated the state’s remaining conservatives?” #1 in debt, #1 in welfare, #1 in taxing the rich. And hoping for a federal bailout, I suspect. As is Illinois, which is in similar straits for similar reasons. “One-third of all the nation’s welfare recipients live in the state, despite the fact that California has only one-eighth of the country’s population. That’s four times as many as the next-highest welfare population, which is New York. Meanwhile, California eighth-graders finished ahead of only Mississippi and District of Columbia students on reading and math test scores in 2011.”

Somebody ask Obama if he won the vote of those making below $30,000 by 30% over Romney, accounting for a multiple of his margin of victory, by expanding the free stuff he was offering them.

The answer is no. He didn’t. He didn’t even promise anything (except to tax the rich)

What he did mainly was:

1) Scare people that the Republicans were trying to take away their right to vote, or make it more diifficult to vote by, for instance, cancelling days of early voting. Or asking for ID, which many had to go to some trouble to get.

2) Scare people into thinking Romney would deport more Hispanics, and just was against them anyway.

Isn’t scaring them that abortion might be made illegal if Romney and Ryan were elected a more logical possibility?

Comment by Sammy Finkelman — 11/20/2012 @ 8:42 am

Do most of the women you know expect they’ll be killing their pre-born babies at some point? I would have thought it something most women never expect they’ll be doing. It’s kind of a hideous thing to do, isn’t it?

SF: Isn’t scaring them that abortion might be made illegal if Romney and Ryan were elected a more logical possibility?

Comment by j curtis — 11/20/2012 @ 9:08 am

Do most of the women you know expect they’ll be killing their pre-born babies at some point?

No, but there must be people like that. Most women who expect abortions actually aren’t worried about the law being changed ut maybe only about being embarassed at coming back. And had mixed feelings anyway.

There was a whole appeal in this campaign to women afraid abortion might be made illegal.

(perhaps thinking not just of themselves but of friends or family members)

MS. RADDATZ: I want to go back to the abortion question here. If the Romney-Ryan ticket is elected, should those who believe that abortion should remain legal be worried?

REP. RYAN: We don’t think that unelected judges should make this decision; that people, through their elected representatives and reaching a consensus in society through the democratic process, should make this determination.

VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: The court — the next president will get one or two Supreme Court nominees. That’s how close Roe v. Wade is.

Just ask yourself: With Robert Bork being the chief adviser on the court for — for Mr. Romney, who do you think he’s likely to appoint? Do you think he’s likely to appoint someone like Scalia or someone else on the court, far right, that would outlaw Planned — excuse me — outlaw abortion? I suspect that would happen.

I guarantee you that will not happen. We picked two people. We picked people who are open-minded. They’ve been good justices. So keep an eye on the Supreme Court —

REP. RYAN: Was there a litmus test on them?

VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: There was no litmus test. We picked people who had an open mind, did not come with an agenda.

They never give up the douyble talk, do they?

Notice that Biden doesn’t merely have abortion returned to the states, which is what an overturning of Roe v Wade would actually do. No, he envinsions a possible Supreme Court decision outlawing abortion, like the West German Supreme Court once made.

(Then one justice was assassinated allegedly in retaliation, by a member of the Beider Meinhoff gang.)

I would have thought it something most women never expect they’ll be doing. It’s kind of a hideous thing to do, isn’t it?

All three victims killed by a Hamas bomb in Israel were members of the Chabad community.

One was a woman who was pregnant, and was a Chabad emissary in India. She was visiting Israel to attend a special service marking the anniversary of the attack on the Chabad House in 2008, killing nine, including Rabbi Gavriel and Rivka Holtzberg.

Romney (and Ryan) was not willing to say out loud that certain things were not likely to happen.

It’s one thing to lose votes because of principle – it’s another thing to lose votes on the basis of something you cannot do.

Romney was also largely – yes Ryan mentioned it in that debate – but Romney was largely unwilling to point out that raising taxes a few percentage points on the highest brackets would not raise all that much money in taxes.

It’s clear that Obama wants this for symbolic reasons.

Maybe to molify people about entitlement cuts, or to raise taxes on other people.

SF: Isn’t scaring them that abortion might be made illegal if Romney and Ryan were elected a more logical possibility?”

Comment by daleyrocks — 11/20/2012 @ 8:48 am

Sammy – Given that Romney wanted states to decide if I have my position correct, isn’t your question just blatant fear mongering?

What Obama and Biden did was fear mongering. I don’t think that what Biden said in that debate was any kind of a gaffe, but probably tallied with what the Obama campaign (or its allied PACS) was saying in targeted ads, emails and robocalls.

Ryan only challenged Biden about a litmus test, not about what the legal consequences of overturning Roe v Wade would be, nor about how easy it would be to see that happen, which is to say, not easy at all.

“The answer is no. He didn’t. He didn’t even promise anything (except to tax the rich)”

Sammy – You would be wrong there.

Extension of unemployment benefits to 99 weeks.
Cut of employee contribution to social security
Relaxation of welfare to work requirements
Continuation of cheap college loans with hints at loan forgiveness
Obamacare subsidies

Good evening, gentlemen. It really is an honor to be here with both of you.

I would like to begin with Libya on a rather somber note. One month ago tonight, on the anniversary of 9/11, Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other brave Americans were killed in a terrorist attack in Benghazi. The State Department has now made clear there were no protesters there. It was a pre-planned assault by heavily armed men. Wasn’t this a massive intelligence failure, Vice President Biden?

Biden does not answer the question!!

He says, instead:

VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: What it was, it was a tragedy, Martha. It — Chris Stevens was one of our best. We lost three other brave Americans.

He goes on to promise that we will find and bring to justice the men who did this and that we will get to the bottom of it, and whatever — wherever the facts lead us, wherever they lead us, we will make clear to the American public, because whatever mistakes were made will not be made again.

Meaning probably mistakes about security. Not about this starting with a demonstration.

And Biden then adds that Obama ended the war in Iraq, which Romney said was a mistake to do, and set a date for ending the war in Afghanistan in 20914, while Romney said no date should be set and that as far as 2014 goes, it depends.

And Obama got bin Laden – why, he Joe Biden, was sitting there on Inauguration Day and witnessed Obama signing an order to the CIA saying his highest priority was to get bin Laden! While Romney was asked a question prior to the (2008) election and said: (says Biden)

I wouldn’t move heaven and earth to get bin Laden. He didn’t understand it was more than about taking a — a murderer off the battlefield; it was about restoring America’s heart and letting terrorists around the world know if you do harm to America, we will track you to the gates of hell, if need be.

SF: “The answer is no. He didn’t. He didn’t even promise anything (except to tax the rich)”

Comment by daleyrocks — 11/20/2012 @ 9:59 am

Sammy – You would be wrong there.

Extension of unemployment benefits to 99 weeks.

I don’t recall that being promised, but of course there was no campaign here. However this is just a continuation of the status quo.

Cut of employee contribution to social security

No, he didn’t promise that. He pointed out he had done that. At esst he poiinted out he had cut taxes. He is not now asking for an extension.

Relaxation of welfare to work requirements

He didn’t promise that, he just did that.

There is a whole story about that I didn’t post. This is something that was outlawed by Congress.

He used a deliberately defective measure – the absolute number of people who went off welfare to work – to measure success. This is a number that is always rising if caseloads rise.

The problem now was that caseloads were not rising so much.

He changed a couple of thing. The reason was to avoid impacting state budgets. The attention of the grass roots was not being drawn to this.

Continuation of cheap college loans with hints at loan forgiveness

That he did.But the target is not particularly poor people, but the middle class.

Obamacare subsidies

Nobody knows a thing about them, and they were aklready in the law – not a campaign promise. he was misleading people also about just what Obamacare does and how it would work.. He never actually mentioned Obamacare.

They argued over who was going to cut entitlements in away so as to hurt people:

….REP. RYAN: Seven point four million seniors are projected to lose the current Medicare Advantage coverage they have. That’s a $3,200 benefit cut.

VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: That didn’t happen.

REP. RYAN: What we’re saying —

VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: More people signed up.

REP. RYAN: These are from your own actuaries.

VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: More — more — more people signed up for Medicare Advantage after the change.

REP. RYAN: What — what they’re —

VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: No — nobody is getting shut down.

REP. RYAN: Mr. Vice President, I know —

VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: No — no — (inaudible) —

REP. RYAN: Mr. Vice President, I know you’re under a lot of duress — (laughter) — to make up for lost ground — (laughter) — but I think people would be better served if we don’t keep interrupting each other.

VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: Well, don’t take all the four minutes, then.

REP. RYAN: Now let me just — let me say this. We are not — we are saying, don’t change benefits for people 55 and above. They already organized their retirement around these promises.

VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: They already are —

REP. RYAN: But you want to — (inaudible) — these programs for those of us —

MS. RADDATZ: Let me ask you this: what is your specific plan for seniors who really can’t afford to make up the difference in the value of what you call a premium support plan and others call a voucher?

REP. RYAN: A hundred percent coverage for them.

MS. RADDATZ: And what —

REP. RYAN: That’s what we’re saying.

MS. RADDATZ: — what cost —

REP. RYAN: So we’re saying income-adjust —

MS. RADDATZ: How do you make that up?

REP. RYAN: — these premium support payments by taking down the subsidies for wealthy people.

Look, this is a plan — by the way, that $6,400 number, it was misleading then. It’s totally inaccurate now. This is a plan that’s bipartisan. It’s a plan I put together with a prominent Democrat senator from Oregon.

VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: There’s not one Democrat who endorsed his —

REP. RYAN: It’s a plan —

VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: — not one Democrat who signed his plan.

REP. RYAN: Our partner is a Democrat from Oregon.

VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: And he said he does no longer support (you for that ?).

REP. RYAN: We — we put it — we put it together with the former Clinton budget director.

As I’ve mentioned before, the problem is that the Republicans can’t defend capitalism morally, so the socialists win by default. Sad, but its true. Brook gives a splendid explanation of why this is so.

You want to defeat these socialist thugs? Then you have to attack them at their weak spot and the Republicans have no clue as to where that is. So how do we expect to win? It’s time to listen to someone who knows where the socialists are really vulnerable.

Sammy – I doesn’t matter if he promised these things during the campaign, does it? These are things he did during his administration and the implication unless otherwise stated is that they would continue.

< Sammy – I doesn’t matter if he promised these things during the campaign, does it? These are things he did during his administration and the implication unless otherwise stated is that they would continue.

Did he promise to end them?

No, not even the payroll tax cut, which he in fact intended to let expire, as near as anyone can tell, although maybe replacing it with something else.

You have your best case with unemployment benefits, although I don’t either Obama or Romney said anything about that. Under current law, it expires.

Sammy – No, you are just rationalizing. All the things I listed were done during the Obama administration and affect people making under $30,000 per year. That is objectively true. That they may also affect people making more than $30,000 is completely irrelevant.

All the things I listed were done during the Obama administration and affect people making under $30,000 per year. That is objectively true. That they may also affect people making more than $30,000 is completely irrelevant.

That didn’t turn out the vote.

By the way, the Republican Party in general has something extremely valuable to offer people making under $30,000, but they never talk much about it.

…the voucher system for K-12 education.

It would save money for the government, give people more money to spend, and improve education.

“Things that aren’t going to change are never an issue in any election.”

Sammy – The funny thing is that I highlighted things that changed, more free stuff provided by Democrats, while you highlighted the same old playbook of Democrat fearmongering that has been their staple for the past 30 years. On the margin, what changed?

As I’ve mentioned before, the problem is that the Republicans can’t defend capitalism morally

Winston Churchill had a problem in 1946, but it hasn’t been a problem for a long time. I don’t know if he ever developed an answer, but the experience of living underr a Labour government with its continued rationing brought him back to power in 1951.

What Republicans have atough time defending are tax cuts for the “rich”

, so the socialists win by default. Sad, but its true. Brook gives a splendid explanation of why this is so.

You want to defeat these socialist thugs? Then you have to attack them at their weak spot and the Republicans have no clue as to where that is. So how do we expect to win? It’s time to listen to someone who knows where the socialists are really vulnerable.

“What Republicans have atough time defending are tax cuts for the “rich””

Sammy – What tax cuts are you talking about? What Democrats have a hard time doing is defining “fairness.”

The U.S. already has the most progressive income tax system in the developed world, with the rich paying the highest share of taxes relative to their share of income. That isn’t fair enough apparently, we need to get more out of balance with the rest of the world.

On I think November 15, The Wall Street Journal reported that under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986, no warrant is needed to access e-mails older than 6 months, (on third party servers I would think) because they are considered abandoned, and Google wants the law changed.

(This abandonment rule may apply only to e-mail that was never opened or read.)

Actually, you are right. A continuation of the current tax rates is not a tax cut. Although Romney was also proposing a separate tax cut and Mitt Romney tied himself up in knots trying to show there would be no net tax cut, on average, for those in the highest income tax brackets.

Midway through the campaign apparently, somebody showed him the idea of limiting the maximum total amount of deductions. This was an answer to the charge that cutting tax brackets while not reducing taxes paid by the highest brackets was impossible. This answer was ignored during the campaign but now Obama and other Democrats like the idea, and they are even crediting Romney.

Previously, Obama’s proposal had been to
limit some deductions so that taxes could only be reduced 28% and not by whatever bracket they were in.

Romney had also said, but he never said it clearly enough, that he didn’t want to reduce the proportion of all income taxes paid by the top bracket – top 1% – people over X number of Dollars of income per year – or whatever. This could happen if more people made more money.

He would say this but never deviate from his phraseology so that it became clear it was an answer.

What Democrats have a hard time doing is defining “fairness.”

The U.S. already has the most progressive income tax system in the developed world, with the rich paying the highest share of taxes relative to their share of income. That isn’t fair enough apparently, we need to get more out of balance with the rest of the world.

And you are right – the income tax code is plenty progressive. Well, of course you had Warren Buffet. The thing there is capital gains and nobody’s proposing raising it to the level of ordinary income, or more. (more because of the special Obamacare surtax on investment income)

Dividends, yes. But if you want honest financial accounting you should be promoting dividends.

The Department of Motor Vehicles tentatively awarded the contract to the high bidder 10 months after New York advised the current vendor, De La Rue North America, that because of “significant budgetary constraints” the state would have to reduce the cost of the contract, according to the court filings.

As a result, De La Rue submitted a bid 10 percent lower for the new, eight-year contract, which ended up being nearly $38 million less than CBN’s bid.

Don’t any of you commenters have silver to polish or tablecloths to iron, or potatoes to peel? (Or is that wimmins work to you people?) Yeah, I suppose you’ll get out the big ass knife and make a theatric production of carving the turkey on Thursday after all the hard part’s done.

From narciso’s link at #2:Plaintiffs have not cited, and the court has not found, any case concluding that secular, for-profit corporations such as Hobby Lobby and Mardel have a constitutional right to the free exercise of religion,” the ruling said.

Hmmm, I imagine there may be some issues when a company is publicly owned vs. privately owned, but I find it interesting that an individual’s right of religious freedom is not assumed when the person is running a business. The article says the store is not open on Sunday, so there is evidence of “sincerely held religious belief”.

Always a bit difficult to pull things out of Revelation with the symbolism, but there is the idea that the ability to buy and sell becomes dependent upon willingness to compromise religious conviction.

A father sees his son nearing manhood.
What shall he tell that son?
“Life is hard; be steel; be a rock.”
And this might stand him for the storms
and serve him for humdrum monotony
and guide him among sudden betrayals
and tighten him for slack moments.
“Life is a soft loam; be gentle; go easy.”
And this too might serve him.
Brutes have been gentled where lashes failed.
The growth of a frail flower in a path up
has sometimes shattered and split a rock.
A tough will counts. So does desire.
So does a rich soft wanting.
Without rich wanting nothing arrives.
Tell him too much money has killed men
and left them dead years before burial:
the quest of lucre beyond a few easy needs
has twisted good enough men
sometimes into dry thwarted worms.
Tell him time as a stuff can be wasted.
Tell him to be a fool every so often
and to have no shame over having been a fool
yet learning something out of every folly
hoping to repeat none of the cheap follies
thus arriving at intimate understanding
of a world numbering many fools.
Tell him to be alone often and get at himself
and above all tell himself no lies about himself
whatever the white lies and protective fronts
he may use against other people.
Tell him solitude is creative if he is strong
and the final decisions are made in silent rooms.
Tell him to be different from other people
if it comes natural and easy being different.
Let him have lazy days seeking his deeper motives.
Let him seek deep for where he is born natural.
Then he may understand Shakespeare
and the Wright brothers, Pasteur, Pavlov,
Michael Faraday and free imaginations
Bringing changes into a world resenting change.
He will be lonely enough
to have time for the work
he knows as his own.

elissa – I did cook Thanksgiving dinner with all the trimmings for 25 on a camp out over the weekend, including two deep fried turkeys and the stuffing, taters and veggies cooked on Coleman stoves. The three different kinds of pie were purchased, however.

With temperatures dropping into the mid 20s overnight, sleeping off a turkey coma in a tent was a great way to go.

Your cookout sounds like it was fab. I hope the company of your friends on Thursday will be better for the digestion than when you’re dining with (and are trying to make polite conversation with) your oft mentioned east coast liberal relatives.

There will be no ceasefire tonight in the rocket and other prjectile shooting competition because hamas may not find it necessary to have arab diplomats visit Gaza since Hillary Clinton went to Cairo raises their status enough.

“I hope the company of your friends on Thursday will be better for the digestion than when you’re dining with (and are trying to make polite conversation with) your oft mentioned east coast liberal relatives.”

elissa – I was out east the prior weekend doing college visits with son No. 3 and unfortunately did not have time to visit with one of my liberal relatives who is afflicted with the gift of universal knowledge. It still feels like enenmy territory each time I go back, though.

The significance of that last bit, JD, is we didn’t know that aspect of Humphries, just the stalker FBI agent who went half Wiener, just like Zimmerman’s history of speaking out against police brutality, or anything laudatory about Sarah,

Patterico on Thanks to Everyone Who Contributed for Leviticus's Baby Girl

narciso on Who Is Indicted Russian Oligarch Yevgeny Prigozhin, and What Are His Connections to Putin?

harkin on Who Is Indicted Russian Oligarch Yevgeny Prigozhin, and What Are His Connections to Putin?

narciso on Who Is Indicted Russian Oligarch Yevgeny Prigozhin, and What Are His Connections to Putin?

narciso on Who Is Indicted Russian Oligarch Yevgeny Prigozhin, and What Are His Connections to Putin?

narciso on Who Is Indicted Russian Oligarch Yevgeny Prigozhin, and What Are His Connections to Putin?

narciso on Who Is Indicted Russian Oligarch Yevgeny Prigozhin, and What Are His Connections to Putin?

urbanleftbehind on Who Is Indicted Russian Oligarch Yevgeny Prigozhin, and What Are His Connections to Putin?

narciso on Who Is Indicted Russian Oligarch Yevgeny Prigozhin, and What Are His Connections to Putin?

urbanleftbehind on Who Is Indicted Russian Oligarch Yevgeny Prigozhin, and What Are His Connections to Putin?

SEARCH AMAZON USING THIS SEARCH BOX:
Purchases made through this search function benefit this site, at no extra cost to you.
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.